Emotions in Veterinary Surgical Students: A Qualitative Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A surgical educational environment is potentially stressful and can negatively affect students' learning. The aim of the present study was to investigate the emotions experienced by veterinary students in relation to their first encounter with live-animal surgery and to identify possible sources of positive and negative emotions, respectively. During a Basic Surgical Skills course, 155 veterinary fourth-year students completed a survey. Of these, 26 students additionally participated in individual semi-structured interviews. The results of the study show that students often experienced a combination of emotions; 63% of students experienced negative emotions, while 58% experienced positive ones. In addition, 61% of students reported feeling excited or tense. Students' statements reveal that anxiety is perceived as counterproductive to learning, while excitement seems to enhance students' focus and engagement. Our study identified the most common sources of positive and negative emotions to be "being able to prepare well" and "lack of self-confidence," respectively. Our findings suggest that there are factors that we can influence in the surgical learning environment to minimize negative emotions and enhance positive emotions and engagement, thereby improving students' learning.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it